Tom: You'd be hard put to find a bigger con-man in the public eye then Watson.But: I always figured his scams would run their course and he'd have to face the music.

It will be interesting to see who takes over for him. Sea Shepard is now basically dependent on the animal planet to stay afloat, money-wise. My guess is once the whale-hunting harrassing stops producing money for them; they'll switch to another target to make money feeling concerned about.

Captain Bob Barker stumbles to the helm. He has equal rights to the term Captain as Paul Watson isn't a papered Captain either.

_________________I use red, not because of anger but to define my posts to catch rebuttals latter and it makes the quote feature redundent for me. The rest of you pick your own color.

Tom: You'd be hard put to find a bigger con-man in the public eye then Watson.But: I always figured his scams would run their course and he'd have to face the music.

It will be interesting to see who takes over for him. Sea Shepard is now basically dependent on the animal planet to stay afloat, money-wise. My guess is once the whale-hunting harrassing stops producing money for them; they'll switch to another target to make money feeling concerned about.

You mean the reason they are anti-whaling is because they got a show from it? Were they not harrassing the whalers way before the show got hold of them?

Tom: You'd be hard put to find a bigger con-man in the public eye then Watson.But: I always figured his scams would run their course and he'd have to face the music.

"A con artist, or a person who uses a fraud method known as a confidence trick." .... is one definition of a con-man. I don't get that he is a con-man or is scamming. I get that he is a person who is passionate about his cause. Whether you or I agree on his methods is perhaps another question. But a scammer and a con-man suggests he is not really interested in this cause, which is not clear or apparent.

Tom: You'd be hard put to find a bigger con-man in the public eye then Watson.But: I always figured his scams would run their course and he'd have to face the music.

"A con artist, or a person who uses a fraud method known as a confidence trick." .... is one definition of a con-man. I don't get that he is a con-man or is scamming. I get that he is a person who is passionate about his cause. Whether you or I agree on his methods is perhaps another question. But a scammer and a con-man suggests he is not really interested in this cause, which is not clear or apparent.

No, he would not have to be disinterested in the cause to be a con-man he could use the con to support his interests, which is usually the case. He gets attention and money for the cause and himself by playing a bit fast and loose with the facts, the laws, and the truth in general. I do not condone terrorists and he is a long time terrorist leader that ignores the law and threat to anyone other than himself whenever it suits him. I would have some respect for him if when he broke the law took the punishment to support his cause, but he does not. He will happily let others do that and may assist them where ever possible ... as long as it benefits him.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

Tom: You'd be hard put to find a bigger con-man in the public eye then Watson.But: I always figured his scams would run their course and he'd have to face the music.

"A con artist, or a person who uses a fraud method known as a confidence trick." .... is one definition of a con-man. I don't get that he is a con-man or is scamming. I get that he is a person who is passionate about his cause. Whether you or I agree on his methods is perhaps another question. But a scammer and a con-man suggests he is not really interested in this cause, which is not clear or apparent.[/quote]

No, he would not have to be disinterested in the cause to be a con-man he could use the con to support his interests, which is usually the case. He gets attention and money for the cause and himself by playing a bit fast and loose with the facts, the laws, and the truth in general. I do not condone terrorists and he is a long time terrorist leader that ignores the law and threat to anyone other than himself whenever it suits him. I would have some respect for him if when he broke the law took the punishment to support his cause, but he does not. He will happily let others do that and may assist them where ever possible ... as long as it benefits him.[/quote]

Seems obvious that he's interested in the cause, for sure. So are you saying that he's interested in attention and money above and beyond his cause? He was doing this thing before the tv show ...... And while others take some punishment ... they ARE adults.

Some crew take the heat while he runs .... but is that not also THEIR cause? Does it benefit him only or does it benefit their mutually agreed on cause?

Watson is all about the money, animal-friendly. Just look closely at how he runs Sea shepard...

Every year; a sudden 'crisis' erupts: "Gosh! We Need MORE MONEY! Send all you can, folks!"

The last few years; those funds Watson whimpered and whined for from others was becoming harder and harder to dig up: he was reaching the point where the number of people who thought he was a clown were outnumbering the folk who kiss his footprints. This was compounded by the info that came forth after the run-in between whalers and Sea shepard's extra-neato speed-boat(Seems a few facts about how Watson runs his biz came out and it cast a light on him and Sea shepard he didn't want) so he had to find another way to raising funds.....and what's better then prime-time T.V?

The problem now is; sea sea-shepard has to rely on the t.v program to keep the cash flow going. Thus: their movement is as much about staying on T.V, as actually saving any whales.

Iowanic"]Watson is all about the money, animal-friendly. Just look closely at how he runs Sea shepard...Every year; a sudden 'crisis' erupts: "Gosh! We Need MORE MONEY! Send all you can, folks!"

Okay. But the crisises that erupt are maybe not so sudden or unexpected. Given that we are economically dependent on producing product, and given that much of that product comes from what might be called the exploitaton of animals AS product .... ??? We are, in fact, experiencing a crisis in the biodiversity of the oceans ... with the denigration of species (shark and whale and what have you .... ). This is not to say that Watson doesn't have an ego, but so do the public figures of most corporations and governements, and indeed, most people.

Quote:

The last few years; those funds Watson whimpered and whined for from others was becoming harder and harder to dig up: he was reaching the point where the number of people who thought he was a clown were outnumbering the folk who kiss his footprints.

I don't know about kissing his footprints. Do you mean "blindly" kissing? Not sure about this as many might agree that governments were and are not doing enough to protect? Watson is for sure a vigilante, but many might agree that they are helpless to defend the species of the oceans given corporate greed for instance. If governments refuse to step up, who will? Not sure of the numbers re: for and against, but many see the guy as a hero in the absence of real government intervention.

Quote:

This was compounded by the info that came forth after the run-in between whalers and Sea shepard's extra-neato speed-boat(Seems a few facts about how Watson runs his biz came out and it cast a light on him and Sea shepard he didn't want) so he had to find another way to raising funds.....and what's better then prime-time T.V?

Maybe you know more about this than I do. But I still don't see it clearly. For example, who approached who about the t.v. show?

Quote:

The problem now is; sea sea-shepard has to rely on the t.v program to keep the cash flow going. Thus: their movement is as much about staying on T.V, as actually saving any whales

Could it be that the tv show created a financial reliance where the financial reliance came from donors before? Either way, I just don't see that Watson is in it for the money. Seems to me that he has an abiding concern for the fate of the whales. Where he gets the money to finance his projects is most likely a secondary concern. I just don't see that he is interested in staying on tv. I see, rather, that he is concerned about whales. If you see it differently or have other information ..... enlighten me to it.

In 2008 Watson persuaded the Discovery Channel to send a television crew to make a reality show documentary about his Antarctic campaign. It turned into a seven-part series called Whale Wars, which became a big hit in America and is about to be shown for the first time in Britain. Life aboard Watson's ship, as it dodges icebergs, crashes through enormous seas and howling storms, and finally reaches the Japanese fleet, makes for highly compelling television, although not for reasons that Watson can be proud of.

Quote:

Quote:

The problem now is; sea sea-shepard has to rely on the t.v program to keep the cash flow going. Thus: their movement is as much about staying on T.V, as actually saving any whales

Could it be that the tv show created a financial reliance where the financial reliance came from donors before? Either way, I just don't see that Watson is in it for the money. Seems to me that he has an abiding concern for the fate of the whales. Where he gets the money to finance his projects is most likely a secondary concern. I just don't see that he is interested in staying on tv. I see, rather, that he is concerned about whales. If you see it differently or have other information ..... enlighten me to it.

Paul Watson is founder and president of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and seems to have found an effective tool in recruiting naïve followers and spreading the word about the nature of his organization's missions --- he lies.

Paul Watson is the founder of the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and an early member of Greenpeace. Over the last few years, Paul has become extremely critical of Greenpeace in the press and at his website. The information below is provided as a service to our supporters to get a few facts out on the table about Paul's history with Greenpeace and the nature of our disagreements.

Paul Watson became active with Greenpeace in 1971 as a member of our second expedition against nuclear weapons testing in Amchitka, and went on to participate in actions against whaling and the killing of harp seals. He was an influential early member but not, as he sometimes claims, a founder.

He was expelled from the leadership of Greenpeace in 1977 by a vote of 11 to one (only Watson himself voted against it).

Bob Hunter (one of Greenpeace's early leaders, after whom a Sea Shepherd vessel was named) described the event in his book, the Greenpeace Chronicles:

'No one doubted his [Watson's] courage for a moment. He was a great warrior brother. Yet in terms of the Greenpeace gestalt, he seemed possessed by too powerful a drive, too unrelenting a desire to push himself front and centre, shouldering everyone else aside… He had consistently gone around to other offices, acting out the role of mutineer. Everywhere he went, he created divisiveness… We all felt we'd got trapped in a web no one wanted to see develop, yet now that it had, there was nothing to do but bring down the axe, even if it meant bringing it down on the neck of our brother."

Consider that this organization enjoys tax exempt status but appears to be involved very closely with questionable business interests. The Society and its leader have been involved in everything from intentionally sinking ships to booby trapping trees which loggers must try to harvest (the practice of which is suspected of seriously injuring at least one mill worker) and they've been involved in generally disrupting legal business enterprises.

Sea Shepherd claims to have multiple vessels in ports around the world yet there is some question as to exactly how many vessels they really own and operate at any given time.

Consider as well that this organization is run by a man who, even while the world grieved over 9/11, stated, "There's nothing wrong with being a terrorist, as long as you win." In fact, just recently with regard to people who do not accept his view of nature conservation, Watson said, "If [you] shot and killed a bank robber, you would be given a medal"

Again, what does all of this mean?

Perhaps it means nothing or perhaps it means everything.

It is difficult to understand how a group, which employs terrorist tactics can be given tax-free status by the U.S. government. Having said this, since Sea Shepherd is indeed considered a non-profit organization, it should not bother Watson to respond to what has the appearance of questionable financial activities and business relationships.

An explanation might prove worthwhile if for nothing else than to ease the minds of anyone who may have donated money to his organization.

Do these facts show illegal or even immoral activities? That question would be best answered by U.S. federal officials / authorities, but these items don’t reflect well on the organization and it would perhaps be in Mr. Watson’s best interest to clear them up for the public record.

According to sources, much of this information and more has already been presented to the IRS but due to a lack of resources and the perceived low priority of the case, a thorough investigation has yet to take place. After all, Mr. Watson does not practice is brand of what some refer to as "eco-terrorism" in that country as often as he does in others.

Some citizens of the U.S. and Canada have contributed to this group. These people, along with the governments of both nations and in particular the government of Newfoundland and Labrador, which has long been the target of the Society’s activities, should be more than interested in getting answers and in requesting that the IRS investigate these matters fully.

I'm sure the public would love to hear Mr. Watson’s explanation, however if he chooses not to respond that’s his decision. In reality his explanations should be given to IRS investigators.

Unlike Watson, I don’t underestimate anyone’s intelligence. I’m confident that our readers are more than smart enough to draw their own conclusions if he chooses not to officially clear these items up once and for all.

_________________With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none” Arthur Schopenhauer

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."Albert Einstein

It'll be interesting to see if ole Gilligan comes out of the basement to sail against the whalersNy guess is he will; since he seems to have such a hard time avoiding the camera whenever there's one around.

Now: if you;re the japanese. would you risk a night-time sneak aboard to detain Watson and return him to authorites?Probably not worth the cost but it would have me laughing if they could pull it off....